Jump to content

Len Thomson

Banned
  • Posts

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Len Thomson

  • Birthday 21/03/1955

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Kent
  • Interests
    Anything British, from 1920 to 1956ish, and always in 1/72 scale

Recent Profile Visitors

1,578 profile views

Len Thomson's Achievements

New Member

New Member (2/9)

0

Reputation

  1. The above profiles are of Lincolns, not Lancasters. The Lanc pic is not a photo but is CGI. Jim, the SAMI Datafile has some shots in it, as do several other books. Here is a small shot
  2. They are there on the kit. They simply have to be bent to meet the doors. Notice how the Revell kit has no representation of the trailing edge nav lights and that the astrodome in the wrong shape and size (including the smaller option - the taller one is for post war variants)
  3. Hi J. Try to get hold of the Battle of Britain, Then and Now for some period pics. Kenley definitely had them, none at Croydon, Hornchurch, Hawkinge, Gravesend, Manston, North Weald, Stapleford Tawney, Debden, Duxford, Middle Wallop, Northolt or Biggin Hill. Rochford and Exeter possibly did have them.
  4. I know the one! I also have it as NE543. Beware the decal sheets! A few points to note: The rocket rails were staggered, with the outboard aiming higher than the inboard. There was an air scoop in front of the windscreen, a gun camera in the wing leading edge. At the time your photo was taken, 455 was based at Langham, in support of D-Day ops. Torpedo release gear was retained, but they never carried them. The codes were probably Sky, but could have had a yellow outline. Here is another couple taken at a later time (different airframes)
  5. The first image was almost certainly taken at Dallachy. 144 Squadron moved there from Banff in October 1944. The squadron was torpedo equipped, no rockets. They converted to rockets in Jan/Feb 1945. I had an article published in Model Aircraft Monthly last month about the Dallachy Strike Wing. Which photo are you talking about? I may have some info for you. There are not too many of 455 Sqn Beaus.
  6. Take a look at these. They both show actuators on top.
  7. Thanks folks. It was actually mentioned on the cover. Bottom left hand side. Watch out for more from me......
  8. Thanks all. I am glad someone answered about the stripes. I thought it was fairly obvious - paint, not dirt. I have amended the title (oops). Simply the lighting, Dave.
  9. Hi Graham. I do not have the Italeri kit so cannot comment about it. It is true that the rear fuselage was deepened by (I think) 7 inches after the -D. For this kit I cut a tapering sliver out of the rear fuselage each side as far forward as the change in profile, just above the curve to the bottom surface, then refixed with super glue to get the correct depth. Hopefully, there will be a magazine article soon which will show more.....
  10. I got this finished last night. It is the Hasegawa -J backdated to a -D for British service. Based at Melsbroek in November 1944, they were pretty weatherbeaten by that time. All comments welcome....
  11. Both models finished at last. Hasegawa in 1/72. Here is NE164 of 144 Squadron and this is NE429 of 489 Squadron Onwards and upwards....
  12. Now wait a cotton picking minute here. Yet again, someone is judging a kit from the so called "test shots". I have to admit, that I can very rarely see the difference between test shots and the production kit, but what the hell is the problem here? For one thing, the CAD drawings are what they say they are - drawings. Not the kit. I agree the tailwheel is too big in the drawings, but they are DRAWINGS. How come no one ever pointed out the error in dihedral in the Airfix kit before. For that matter, no one has pointed out an error in the dihedaral in the Hasegawa kit, and they look the same built up. Ask me, I have built both, several times. I also cannot see why people keep criticising the Hasegawa kit so much. Yes, I know it is/was much more expensive than the new Revell kit, but it is not that bad. I agree that the cockpit escape hatch is in the wrong place, but it can be fixed (have you looked at the state of the Airfix Lancaster canopy, or the turrets?) . The outer engines hang a little off vertical, but they can be fixed. I have even heard it said that the fuselage cross section of the Hasegawa Lancaster is incorrect (too wide!). Interesting that the Paragon Lincoln parts fit pretty well but they were intended for the Airfix Lanc, and no one has said that the cross section of that one was wrong. Everyone says that the Airfix Lancaster is the best (at the momemt) in 1/72. But the engine nacelles taper too much towards the front. The undercarriage needs a lot of work. Not a mention of that. Everyone raves about the restrained panel lines and rivets. Great, they are in scale. Try restoring them after the sanding that is required to make the joints good. Are the rudders correct? Where are the mass balances? Having looked at the instructions for the Revell Lancaster, it appears that the interior is incorrect (pilots seat, in fact all the seats, nav's table, Gee equipment, etc etc). Anyone mentioned that? Nope. But that is OK, because it can't be seen. It is still incorrect. Don't those engine parts look wonderful? Will they look like an uncowled Merlin? Not without a lot of work. No mention of that either. Seen the bomb carriers in the instructions. Nothing like the real thing. I agree that we should be expecting near perfection in new kits with the research and knowledge that is available today, but quite simply, it ain't going to happen. I like to think people know from various articles available that I have no particular bias towards Airfix, or against Airfix, or for Hasegawa or against Hasegawa, or for Revell or against Revell. Or any manufacturer. I build what I have, improve or correct if I want to, or where necessary. And the reason I do that? Because no kit is perfect. I will build the Revell Lancaster, correct where necessary, and be happy with it (it looks like a very nice kit). I doubt the dihedral is wrong...... Of course, there may be those who only want to build kits which are supposedly perfect and have to do nothing to put them right. They might have a long wait. In addition they will not have an accurate model, because no kit is perfectly accurate. Live with it!
  13. It is a good kit. The tail rotors need the rotation direction reversed. I did this with mine without any aftermarket, apart from decals.......
  14. Thanks for clearing that up Kyrre. It will be useful for "you know what".... My understanding was that the location of many targets at that stage in the was led to the use of the torpedo being phased out, hence the conversion to rockets. The lack of rails could be that they were simply flak suppression, cannon armed machines. Any thoughts on that? Did you notice the fin flash style on P6-L1? Check the pics Mike. Most Beaus has the rings painted dark grey, almost black. I feel it was some form of heat resistant paint, which weathered rather badly.
  15. Hey hey hey. As you know, we have had several discussions about Dallachy, Kyrre. My sources say that 489 Sqn (and 144 Sqn) was converting from torpedos to rockets at the time of Black Friday. I am not sure when the "thimble and spine" Beaus came into service, but I would think they were pretty late. Do you have a time period for the model?
×
×
  • Create New...